Alex Mizrahi [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: 📅 Original date posted:2014-12-12 📝 Original message:> > "Secure" and "client ...
📅 Original date posted:2014-12-12
📝 Original message:>
> "Secure" and "client side validation" don't really belong in the same
> sentence, do they?
>
Well, client-side validation is mathematically secure, while SPV is
economically secure.
I.e. it is secure if you make several assumptions about economics of the
whole thing.
In my opinion the former is transfinitely more secure than the later.
But it's more of a philosophical question, sure.
The good thing about PoW-based consensus is that it is robust against
version inconsistencies and various accidents of this nature up to a
certain degree. But you hardly can depend on that:
You know, The Great Fork of 2013 was resolved through human intervention,
Bitcoin nodes were not smart enough to detect that something is going awry
on their own.
Naive proof-of-publication is very fragile in that respect, but you can
easily bring back robustness.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20141212/76a5cbeb/attachment.html>;
📝 Original message:>
> "Secure" and "client side validation" don't really belong in the same
> sentence, do they?
>
Well, client-side validation is mathematically secure, while SPV is
economically secure.
I.e. it is secure if you make several assumptions about economics of the
whole thing.
In my opinion the former is transfinitely more secure than the later.
But it's more of a philosophical question, sure.
The good thing about PoW-based consensus is that it is robust against
version inconsistencies and various accidents of this nature up to a
certain degree. But you hardly can depend on that:
You know, The Great Fork of 2013 was resolved through human intervention,
Bitcoin nodes were not smart enough to detect that something is going awry
on their own.
Naive proof-of-publication is very fragile in that respect, but you can
easily bring back robustness.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20141212/76a5cbeb/attachment.html>;